Slashdot Mirror


ISP Forced Out of Business by DoS

flyhmstr writes "According to a report on ISPReview Cloud Nine have been forced off line and out of business thanks to the actions of crackers deciding to go play with some DoS tools." It's only getting worse. The kids are getting more and more aggressive as time goes on and it gets easier and easier to launch a large scale DoS. As any techie knows, fixing the problem is far easier said then done... but as a frequent recipient of the sharp end of the DoS stick, I sure wish it wasn't an issue.

14 of 535 comments (clear)

  1. Re:which side of the law is our community on? by BgJonson79 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the scrupt kiddies buy the hardware like we buy the DVDs maybe you have a case, otherwise it seems to me like apples and oranges to me.

    --

    There are four boxes used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order.

  2. Re:Extreme? by arkanes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They get charged through the nose for all the bandwidth the attack takes. Theres a certain amount of money budgeted for bandwidth, but the a DoS attack hits and suddenly you're running at 100x normal bandwidth cost for however long it takes you to break the attack - that kind of fee can certainly break a company that already lives on the edge.

  3. Re:which side of the law is our community on? by berzerke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The unwashed masses out there see both of these as the same thing...



    That is the problem. I always try to explain it this way: There are good doctors, and there are bad doctors. There are good lawyers, and there are bad lawyers. There are good cops, and there are bad cops. (etc.) And there are good hackers, and bad hackers.

  4. Re:I wonder why? by sphealey · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Can someone please clue me into why people do this? I don't quite understand this mentality. I have never done something bad like this simply because I could. Am I a rarity in this world?
    If 1000 people walk down a backstreet past an empty building, 998 will just pass by. 2 will throw a rock through a window and spraypaint the walls.

    This just seems to be part of human nature; I haven't seen much change in the percentage of people who behave this way since my childhood (1960's) anyway. The problem is that the world today is so interconnected, and also dependent on technologies whose webs of interconnection are more fragile than we like to think, that the 2/1000 with the desire to damage can do a lot more damage to a lot more people than ever before.

    I am a bit discouraged myself about whether or not this can be stopped on the Internet, personally.

    sPh

  5. We're in the grey area. by phathead296 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is a world of difference between trying to maintain our fair use rights or exposing bad "security" methods and launching a DDoS attack against ANYONE.

    This is not a black and white issue. A DoS attack is both illegal and imoral, as what you are doing hurts a large group of people. Exposing bad security in e-book files will help people in the long run. (Although it will help the copyright holders and not us :( )

    As for the general population, it depends entirely on what the media reports. They can report that "hackers" have cracked a protection scheme, or they can report that a digital protection scheme was proven inadequate. Both are technically true, but each favors one group as the good guy. Unfortunately, since news is an entertainment forum, the first is more likely to be reported.

    Until the general population is tech savvy enough to understand these issues, the media will have complete control over their opinions.

    Cheers,
    Phathead

  6. No technical solution, it's an apathy thing... by anthonyclark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is that sysadmins see the scans from these kiddies and ignore them (those that even have a portsentry or similar application in place). If you saw someone walking around your house and trying the doors and windows, you'd call the police right away, wouldn't you?

    So why do the kiddies get off free? Sheer apathy from most of the sysadmins in the world.

    When you get scanned, you have the address (if it's not spoofed), you can send a mail to abuse@domain. But most people don't, because It's too much hassle or we can't be bothered or no harm was done.

    Script Kiddies will have a far harder time when admins start practising zero tolerance.

    --
    ----- Documentation is worth it just to be able to answer all your mail with 'RTFM' - Alan Cox.
  7. Re:which side of the law is our community on? by fatphil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're far to direct to get any attention, alas. You deserve an upmod for sure.

    To reiterate and expand:

    The DoS-ers are causing material and practical harm to the equipment of others.

    The LiVid guys etc. are doing something useful and practical with something that they own.

    The two situations are _diametrically opposed_.

    FP.
    (I don't mind being redundant if it helps some people get the point!)

    --
    Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
  8. Re:which side of the law is our community on? by Flower · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Taking the article at face value, a business has had to close because it was being deliberately assaulted by vandals. I can point out people who are now out of work, customers who have lost a service they wanted, resources wasted, etc., etc.. This wasn't "our" stuff that was being abused. It was a bunch of regular Joes and Janes out their being deprived of a service they purchased.

    Compare this to stuff like DeCSS, Felton's work on SDMI and the rest. Showing why something doesn't work or getting additional functionality out of a product just isn't the same as maliciously depriving a business of the resources it requires to survive.

    It isn't hard to explain but what is hard is getting the message out when Disney and the like are spouting their propaganda at 11 and with the simple fact that this isn't a bullet issue for the proverbial Joe Average.

    --
    I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
  9. Re:which side of the law is our community on? by Tassach · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Of course, we reserve the right to define what are "good laws" and what are "bad laws", and in what cases a particular law that we consider "bad" is suddenly "good" or vice versa...


    It's pretty easy to tell good laws from bad ones, using objective standards:



    Good laws protect individual freedoms and provide a level playing field for everyone.



    Bad laws destroy liberty and favor special interests over the good of the whole.

    --
    Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  10. Martial Law. . ? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I recently watched one of the high-end news shows which ran an hour documentary on hackers and the net.

    For one section, they had cameras sit in on a bunch of young military techies studying the logistics of combating a huge hack-attack; like nuclear power plants being shut down or hacked into danger zones. Airlines losing planes. That kind of thing.

    I've been pondering just how exactly the developed nations could be whammied into a state of martial law. The current world situation doesn't have enough momentum to actually put thousands of Americans in prison camps. And the forces which drove the Nazis just aren't there. ("We are descendants of superior Aryans from space!" -No joke.) People today, while easily manipulated, haven't been sold that kind of propaganda, but it remains quite clear that a form of undeclared fascism (That is, "freedom", so long as you eat shit, breath shit, think shit, absorb shit media, and work too hard, and don't mind being overseen by Shirow-style O.R.C.S. with machine gunes, in order that you be reduced to the position of Zombie-like Serfdom), this it seems to me, will be the natural conclusion given the forces of greed and corporate evil moving in the world today.

    Choice means that people might not buy your product. Remove choice, while maintaining the illusion of a free society, and bingo! You have the perfect consumer; driven because s/he still believes in the American Dream, but a serf nonetheless, whose task it is to pour wealth into the coffers of the powerful. And to be miserable for those who eat misery. . .

    Anyway, it was interesting; the documentary basically said the following:

    1) Security basically doesn't exist and isn't getting any better. Information systems are open to those who understand how.

    2) The possibility of a huge disaster is ever-present and continues to grow as we become more dependant on I.T.

    One military analyst basically said, with a straight & serious face, that in the event of a huge digital attack, "Declare martial law. Shut everybody down and take control of the situation. That'd be my recommendation."

    Hmmm.

    I don't know how true the above is, but the fact that it was being sold by a respected authority voice, indicates that they're trying to soften people up for just such a turn of events.


    -Fantastic Lad

  11. Re:Obstruction? by tomblackwell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have you tried recently to sue a 14-year-old in Singapore or Russia or South America?

  12. uh...no? by MemeRot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're monkeys hurling feces. They will stop if they think a bigger monkey will kick their ass. That's why they're not firebombing people, because if they did that they'd get caught. But the cop monkeys don't understand DoS attacks so there is no fear of reprisal. Look at how monkeys deal with the issue. Do you really think humans have any better a handle on it?

  13. Re:whoops by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 4, Insightful

    it's kind of ironic that it's really the ISPs that are to blame for the proliferation of DDOS attacks anyway, they are the ones allowing their users machines to send out ping floods and nasty UDP crap in the first place. ISPs seem eager enough to bump users off for exceeding their (usually unpublished) bandwidth limits, but they couldn't care less about virus and DDOS traffic.

    --
    That was classic intercourse!
  14. Re:I wonder why? by overunderunderdone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do these kids need a hug?

    Actually, this is probably closer to the truth than most people realize.


    I will agree with this. These kids are doing this to make themselves feel powerful. They want to feel important, significant. If they were made to feel their significance by the people to whom they should be significant - their parents - perhaps they would be less likely to seek a feeling of power in mindless destruction. Though there is no guarantee - even a person without excuse, loved, cared for, etc. can lack the self-control to tame their baser desires.

    If you think about it, you realize it is only possible to hurt someone else (or their property) if you feel like you are hurting yourself.

    Now I have to disagree - sort of. Their indulgence in malice and cruelty, their seeking after the thrill of power does them harm. But in their self absorbtion they are only aware of how good it feels to wield that power - to feel important. They do not feel hurt, they feel powerful.

    The really sad thing is, when we find someone who is hurting, and has demonstrated this to us by hurting someone else, we hurt them more by punishing them. Thats a human approach, but it will only result in larger problems. When someone hurts us we should help them by giving them a hug... or something :)

    Here I have to disagree - for several reasons. First: If someone cannot exersise enough self-control to refrain from hurting others they must be externally controlled by someone else (the state or their parents) - either by actual physical restraint or by the credible threat of punishment. Also, while they still need "a hug" love and acceptance from those from whom it is due - now that is not enough. I don't think their can be healing without honest regret (not just regret for being caught but for being *wrong*) - that is up to the criminal, no one can either force them through punishment or manipulate them through compassion to arrive at that repentance. There also can't be healing without suffering real (depending on the crime even harsh) consequences. Even kids have an inate sense of justice (that I believe is valid) and that even criminals will acknowledge. It does not do the do the victim or society at large - but especially the criminal - any favors by bypassing the requirements of justice. A penitant criminal who has been punished for his crimes can start again. A penitant criminal who has escaped punishment will feel the unfairness of that escape and a continued sense of guilt. He will be crippled in his ability to begin anew. An unrepentant criminal will take either scenario as an excuse to continue in their crime.